Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 1999;60(5):308-20.
doi: 10.1007/BF01301244.

Adult patients' view of orthodontic treatment outcome compared to professional assessments

[Article in English, German]
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Adult patients' view of orthodontic treatment outcome compared to professional assessments

[Article in English, German]
T Riedmann et al. J Orofac Orthop. 1999.

Abstract

One important aspect in evaluating the outcome and quality of orthodontic treatment is the patient's own assessment. The objective of this study was to evaluate the course and outcome of orthodontic treatment in adults from the patient's vs the operator's point of view. In a previous study, the orthodontic treatment of 88 adults was evaluated using the IOTN and PAR Index before and after treatment. Fifty-nine patients answered treatment questionnaires on 1. the reason for seeking treatment, 2. dentofacial aesthetics, 3. treatment outcome, 4. course of treatment, 5. attitude, 6. social well-being. Depending on the original treatment goal, the patient population was divided into an Ideal Group and a Compromise Group. In 75% of the patients, dissatisfaction with dental aesthetics was the prime motive for seeking treatment; correlations with PAR parameters (overjet and maxillary anterior teeth) were weak. In general, a high degree of patient satisfaction with orthodontic treatment was registered. As regards satisfaction with post-treatment dental aesthetics there were no significant differences between the groups. Comparison of professional assessment with the subjective rating by patients revealed discrepancies in that the patients' rating of outcome tended to be more positive. The differentiation between ideal and compromise treatment goals proved useful. In the Compromise Group, a high level of patient satisfaction was attained with a shorter treatment duration and lower appliance involvement. 92% considered their major pre-treatment need to have been met, and 95% would have had the treatment performed again.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Acta Odontol Scand. 1994 Apr;52(2):106-10 - PubMed
    1. Eur J Orthod. 1991 Feb;13(1):7-14 - PubMed
    1. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1986 Aug;14(4):217-20 - PubMed
    1. N Y State Dent J. 1967 Apr;33(4):215-20 - PubMed
    1. Am J Orthod. 1984 Mar;85(3):253-9 - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources